Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.97a is out! (02/02/24); New blog post: Codex Overhaul (05/11/24)

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8]

Author Topic: [0.97a] Tri-Tac Special Circumstances - V 0.9 03/30/24  (Read 95752 times)

Dazs

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1084
    • View Profile

Hello. Thanks for all your excellent mods :)
That is so nice to wake up to :)
The Caconomyl doesn't have the Phase Field hullmod as most phase ships do--is this intentional?
Ohh that big boy gets a lot of comments on Discord when TTSC is discussed. It is probably my most love/HATE ship to date :) I have planned some balancing for the Caconyml when TTSC gets around in the queue for updates so I'll check that when I do.
I love the rift beams, but they're broken OP. Not necessarily suggesting you "balance them"; it's your mod and all but maybe make them quest rewards? If you can even do that in Starsector. It's mostly the large mount ones that can get silly with energy weapons mastery and High Scatter Amplifier.
Speaking of most love/HATE... :) I like beams and I thought that Vanilla did not cover all the bases so when I set out to make a high-tech centric mod I knew I had to specialize in them. I thought to myself, would Tri-Tac just ignore captured omega weapons when they are the ones that developed the Remnant in the first place? A greedy corporation letting profits just sit on the table seemed a bit odd to me. Essentially TTSC are the spec ops division of Tri-Tac with cut out deniability when the Hegemony and Ludds come a calling. Now I already have a zillion custom weapons if you add up all my mods so I wanted a lore tie-in for TTSC. I married those ideas when I designed the vision for the mod. So I rather than make custom beam weapons for them it made internal lore sense to me that they would be the testing grounds for experimental "illegal?" versions of already existing weapons and hiding them in plain sight using the same weapon models every one else does.

Ok so I may have TLDR myself off topic there so I took a sip of coffee and focused up. With all that above in mind, when I looked at all the existing vanilla beams I found a lack in variety so I used the RIFT line to add a spicy kick. It was brought to my attention on multiple occasions that was a bad decision on many levels so in v0.7 I did "balance" them so they would not be as good as omega weapons. I will look them over again at some point but I want to stay true to my lore tie in while doing it so we'll see.
Also, sometimes I'm getting attacked by TTSC fleets that use ships from other factions primarily (mostly CFT); it seems to be designed that way since it'll have a parenthetical reference in the fleet name--nothing wrong with it, just curious if I'm hallucinating or not :)
TTSC is my aggressive (playable) faction, CFT and JYD are both neutralists. So they will actively hunt down anything they do not like and CFT, if left to their own rudder, will steer more toward Pirate and TTSC will pounce on them. So no you are not hallucinating, TTSC will scavenge other faction ships and use them. I just seems CFT in your game needs the reminder that they should not poke the bear. :)

steve1592

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 31
    • View Profile

So I like to add your mod to a campaign that is in progress with Nexerelin all factions spawn enabled. This way I get the weapons and ships without the market bloat. Unfortunetely, everytime I try to add your mod to a game in progress it crashes with this error. Specifically when I try to load a save.

Code
ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain  - java.lang.RuntimeException: Fighter wing with id [drg_sheen] not found for faction [zea_dawn]
java.lang.RuntimeException: Fighter wing with id [drg_sheen] not found for faction [zea_dawn]

Redownloaded and isolated it to just your mod. And the error is weird because zea_down is from knights of ludd. So maybe a crossmod conflict. I don't know.
« Last Edit: March 09, 2024, 09:06:34 PM by steve1592 »
Logged

steve1592

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 31
    • View Profile

Actually I had an outdated HTE which I believe is the issue will test tomorrow.
Logged

Dazs

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1084
    • View Profile

So I like to add your mod to a campaign that is in progress with Nexerelin all factions spawn enabled. This way I get the weapons and ships without the market bloat. Unfortunetely, everytime I try to add your mod to a game in progress it crashes with this error. Specifically when I try to load a save.

Code
ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain  - java.lang.RuntimeException: Fighter wing with id [drg_sheen] not found for faction [zea_dawn]
java.lang.RuntimeException: Fighter wing with id [drg_sheen] not found for faction [zea_dawn]

Redownloaded and isolated it to just your mod. And the error is weird because zea_down is from knights of ludd. So maybe a crossmod conflict. I don't know.

Actually I had an outdated HTE which I believe is the issue will test tomorrow.
I was about to post that drg_ is a high tech expansion prefix but you diagnosed that yourself. I would be curious if updating fixed your issue because I run all three mods in my game and have not come across a crash.

steve1592

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 31
    • View Profile

It works had to dig up the most recent version of HTE because I believe some mod requires drg_sheen fighter which only the most recent version of HTE has.
Logged

Dazs

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1084
    • View Profile

It works had to dig up the most recent version of HTE because I believe some mod requires drg_sheen fighter which only the most recent version of HTE has.
I am happy to hear you solved it. I am surprised a mod requires an asset from another mod w/out making it a dependency. Anyway, thanks for the update and have a fun time now you can play again! :)

Shogouki

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 408
    • View Profile

I saw in your CFT thread you were working on a TTSC update and I just thought I'd ask why a few of their military ships have a shield efficiency of 1 rather than a more typical efficiency for high-tech ships? 
Logged

Dazs

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1084
    • View Profile

I saw in your CFT thread you were working on a TTSC update and I just thought I'd ask why a few of their military ships have a shield efficiency of 1 rather than a more typical efficiency for high-tech ships?
Well hello there Shogouki my friend. Depending on the size/spec of the ship they vary from 0.6 to 1.2 with various upkeep. The ones that are 1 and above are mostly hybrid ships like the combat freighters/combat tankers. There are I believe two exceptions but that was to balance out other advantages they have. Since there are 29 ships in the TTSC lineup, if you could narrow down your query to specific ones I can better answer. I put aside a couple hours tomorrow to work on this mod so if you can get in any feedback before then I will consider any changes for that update.

Shogouki

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 408
    • View Profile

I saw in your CFT thread you were working on a TTSC update and I just thought I'd ask why a few of their military ships have a shield efficiency of 1 rather than a more typical efficiency for high-tech ships?
Well hello there Shogouki my friend. Depending on the size/spec of the ship they vary from 0.6 to 1.2 with various upkeep. The ones that are 1 and above are mostly hybrid ships like the combat freighters/combat tankers. There are I believe two exceptions but that was to balance out other advantages they have. Since there are 29 ships in the TTSC lineup, if you could narrow down your query to specific ones I can better answer. I put aside a couple hours tomorrow to work on this mod so if you can get in any feedback before then I will consider any changes for that update.

I think the ones I was thinking of were the symmetrical Odyssey and another rectangular battlecarrier.  When I look at the stats for both they don't seem to have anything to make up for the low shield efficiency, at least not from their stats, hardpoints and abilities alone.
Logged

Dazs

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1084
    • View Profile

I saw in your CFT thread you were working on a TTSC update and I just thought I'd ask why a few of their military ships have a shield efficiency of 1 rather than a more typical efficiency for high-tech ships?
Well hello there Shogouki my friend. Depending on the size/spec of the ship they vary from 0.6 to 1.2 with various upkeep. The ones that are 1 and above are mostly hybrid ships like the combat freighters/combat tankers. There are I believe two exceptions but that was to balance out other advantages they have. Since there are 29 ships in the TTSC lineup, if you could narrow down your query to specific ones I can better answer. I put aside a couple hours tomorrow to work on this mod so if you can get in any feedback before then I will consider any changes for that update.

I think the ones I was thinking of were the symmetrical Odyssey and another rectangular battlecarrier.  When I look at the stats for both they don't seem to have anything to make up for the low shield efficiency, at least not from their stats, hardpoints and abilities alone.
I like your descriptions, I knew which you meant right away :) I'll look them over later today when I work on the mod and compare them to their closest vanilla analogs. Thank you for the "clarity" ;)

Dazs

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1084
    • View Profile
Re: [0.97a] Tri-Tac Special Circumstances - V 0.9 03/30/24
« Reply #115 on: March 30, 2024, 04:59:44 PM »

v0.9 released today - Save Compatible with v0.8.1
   -Added the "phasefield" built in hull mod to the Caconyml - TY last_misadventure for noticing my mistake
   -Changed the shield efficiency on the Eschatologist and Arbitrary from 1 to 0.8 -Ty Shogouki for your input
   -Doubled the value of the TTSC ship BP package since it does have more valuable ships than standard - Ty Tirpitz for bringing that to my attention
   -Replaced the built-in hull mod Fighter Chassis Storage on the Hronish with Expanded Deck Crew - Big oopsie on my part ty TameFroggy for pointing out that is meant for stations only

I tried to make a nex/nonex combined single download but I was unsuccessful. Both versions of TTSC have been updated to 0.9 so d/l the one you prefer. I also took a stab at re-writing the ship descriptions but my brain just wasn't feeling creative so I shelved that for when I have more time. I wanted to get this update out before the holiday so I can get caught up with other mod updates next week. However, I know that those descriptions are basic and I will try again to write better ones in a future update.

Shogouki

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 408
    • View Profile
Re: [0.97a] Tri-Tac Special Circumstances - V 0.9 03/30/24
« Reply #116 on: March 31, 2024, 12:10:00 PM »

I hope I didn't pressure you into those changes.  I had just asked because I had looked at those ships several times and couldn't really figure out what they had going for them that made up for the shield efficiency, especially the Eschatologist since its description says that it's a front line ship but it also didn't have good armor or a fortress shield or anything.
Logged

Dazs

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1084
    • View Profile
Re: [0.97a] Tri-Tac Special Circumstances - V 0.9 03/30/24
« Reply #117 on: March 31, 2024, 12:37:46 PM »

I hope I didn't pressure you into those changes.  I had just asked because I had looked at those ships several times and couldn't really figure out what they had going for them that made up for the shield efficiency, especially the Eschatologist since its description says that it's a front line ship but it also didn't have good armor or a fortress shield or anything.
I did not feel pressured, I took your advice to look them over and in testing I found them a bit wanting in the front line department. The Xenocrat being the big boy front liner has an efficiency of .06 and I felt 0.8 felt right for their roles. If you find the changes still in need of adjustment, I would welcome the feedback. Please never feel like you are pressuring me in doing so as I use feedback as a starting point and make adjustments based on my own testing. I am a solo act juggling six mods and it can get overwhelming so I rely on players like you to open my eyes to defects so we can make the mods the best they can be.

Msgunner

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
Re: [0.97a] Tri-Tac Special Circumstances - V 0.9 03/30/24
« Reply #118 on: April 01, 2024, 07:03:50 PM »

Hello there, I seemed to have run into a slight problem with the latest version of the "nonex" version of this mod. Upon opening starsector, it crashes to desktop and states its a "fatal: directory" caused by the data/hulls/TTTSC_caconyml.ship file. Apparently it thinks there needs to be a ',' or ']' at 359 [character 5 line 16]. I checked that area and it looks like thats where the new phasefield previously mentioned is located. I am not too knowledgeable about codding and not entirely sure how to go about this, so i thought that i should just bring this up. Any help would be most appreciated.
Logged

Dazs

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1084
    • View Profile
Re: [0.97a] Tri-Tac Special Circumstances - V 0.9 03/30/24
« Reply #119 on: April 02, 2024, 12:04:58 AM »

Hello there, I seemed to have run into a slight problem with the latest version of the "nonex" version of this mod. Upon opening starsector, it crashes to desktop and states its a "fatal: directory" caused by the data/hulls/TTTSC_caconyml.ship file. Apparently it thinks there needs to be a ',' or ']' at 359 [character 5 line 16]. I checked that area and it looks like thats where the new phasefield previously mentioned is located. I am not too knowledgeable about codding and not entirely sure how to go about this, so i thought that i should just bring this up. Any help would be most appreciated.
Hello Msgunner, thank you for brining this to my attention. I looked into it and my apologies for the oopsie. I fixed the issue and re-uploaded 0.9 for the NoNex version. Delete the current version in your mods folder, re-download and install and it'll work. I did not change the version number to keep it consistent with the main version but there is an additional note in the NoNex changelog with a TY to you for letting me know. 
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8]